participant reports assessment - who...codex meetings and what the impact of these meetings is at...
TRANSCRIPT
Participant Reports
Assessment Codex Trust Fund
Céline Gossner
May 2008
2
CONTENTS
1. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT OF THE STUDY.............................................................. 4
2. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY ................................................................................................ 4
3. MATERIAL & METHOD OF THE STUDY............................................................................ 4
3.1. Country reports .................................................................................................................. 4
3.2. Methodology...................................................................................................................... 4
3.3. Assessment Criteria ........................................................................................................... 5
4. SCOPE AND BOUNDARIES OF THE STUDY...................................................................... 6
4.1. Timeframe and meetings.................................................................................................... 6
4.2. Reports .............................................................................................................................. 6
5. RESULTS OF THE COUNTRY REPORT ANALYSIS:.......................................................... 7
AUGUST 2005 – JULY 2006 and AUGUST 2006 – JULY 2007 ................................................. 7
5.1.Quantity and Quality of the reports ..................................................................................... 7
5.2. Overview of the results ...................................................................................................... 8
5.3. Before the meetings ........................................................................................................... 9
5.4. During the meetings......................................................................................................... 10
5.5. After the meetings............................................................................................................ 11
5.6. Challenges faced at national level .................................................................................... 14
5.7. Requests for regional training .......................................................................................... 15
5.8. Conclusion....................................................................................................................... 15
6. RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................................................ 16
6.1. Stakeholder analysis......................................................................................................... 16
6.2. Codex Trust Fund’s perspective: Why the Codex Trust Fund should assess reports.......... 16
6.3. Beneficiaries' perspectives: Why they should write good reports...................................... 17
6.4. Key Performance Indicators ............................................................................................ 17
6.5. Recommendations to improve the reporting process/effectiveness of Codex Trust Fund .. 18
ANNEX 1. LIST OF MEETINGS .............................................................................................. 21
ANNEX 2. QUOTES FROM REPORTS OF PARTICULAR INTEREST.................................. 22
3
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Report content ............................................................................................................... 5
Figure 2. Report classification ...................................................................................................... 6
Figure 3. Availability of the country reports for the total period.................................................... 7
Figure 4. Overall quality of country reports from August 2005 to July 2007 ................................. 7
Figure 5. Country report availability ............................................................................................. 8
Figure 6. Comparison in the quality of the reports between the two periods observed ................... 8
Figure 7. Overview of the results .................................................................................................. 9
Figure 8. Preparation for the meeting............................................................................................ 9
Figure 9. Type of preparation ..................................................................................................... 10
Figure 10. Gain from the meeting ............................................................................................... 10
Figure 11. Type of benefit .......................................................................................................... 11
Figure 12. Evidence of debriefing and sharing knowledge .......................................................... 12
Figure 13. Type of evidence ....................................................................................................... 12
Figure 14. Impact of the meetings............................................................................................... 12
Figure 15. Type of impact of the meeting at national level.......................................................... 13
Figure 16. National challenges.................................................................................................... 14
Figure 17. Type of challenges faced ........................................................................................... 14
Figure 18. Interaction between stakeholders ............................................................................... 16
Figure 19. Purpose of country reports assessment ....................................................................... 17
4
1. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT OF THE STUDY
The Codex Alimentarius Commission’s purpose is to elaborate and develop international food
safety system and standards. The Codex Trust Fund was established in 2003 in order to help
developing countries and countries in transition to increase their participation in the Commission’s
work. Since its establishment, the Codex Trust Fund has subsidized 96 countries and offered the
chance to participate in Codex meetings to 224 delegates1. Led by a desire to implement a results
based management structure, the Codex Trust Fund is currently developing a Monitoring and
Evaluation Framework. The objective of the framework is to assess the Codex Trust Fund’s
efficiency and to increase its accountability vis-à-vis donor countries.
2. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
The principal objective of the study is to measure what developing countries gain by attending
Codex meetings and what the impact of these meetings is at national level. Additionally, this study
is an assessment of the participant reports submitted by Codex Trust Fund beneficiaries to the
Codex Trust Fund Secretariat.
The output of the study is an analysis of the participant reports as well as recommendations on
how to improve the reporting process.
The outcomes of the study will lead to the development of a facilitated reporting process that will
improve the quality and quantity of reports transmitted to the Codex Trust Fund secretariat and use
of these reports to feed into the monitoring and evaluation of the Trust Fund. The objective is to
enhance the impact of Codex Trust Fund support on the beneficiary countries.
3. MATERIAL & METHOD OF THE STUDY
3.1. Country reports
As part of their participant obligations, all participants who receive support from the Codex Trust
Fund must send a report by email, fax or post to the Codex Trust Fund Secretariat. Beneficiary
countries must fulfill this obligation in order to be eligible for further funding. A suggested format
for the report is available on the Codex Trust Fund website in each of the six official United
Nations languages.
Extract from the application form:
"Note that applications for support in subsequent years will not be considered unless outstanding
reports have been submitted. It is strongly recommended that supported participants complete their
reports one month after attending the meeting."
3.2. Methodology
The methodology for the study was divided in three main steps:
1) Data gathering: collect reports, elaborate assessment spreadsheet, read reports available,
record data.
2) Data analysis.
3) Reporting and recommendations.
1 As at December 31
st 2007
5
3.3. Assessment Criteria
Reports were broadly assessed according to whether they covered the entire meeting process;
whether they provided the general and specific information contained in Figure 1 below as
outlined in the reporting template.
Figure 1. Report content
To capture the information that is relevant to assess the report, a “Data Gathering Spreadsheet”
was developed. The reports submitted were individually assessed following pre-defined criteria
and classified into four categories: Excellent, Good, Medium and Insufficient.
6
Figure 2. Reports classification
4. SCOPE AND BOUNDARIES OF THE STUDY
4.1. Timeframe and meetings
The study is limited to the assessment of reports from meetings held during the two following
periods: August 2005 to July 2006 and from August 2006 to July 2007.2 The meetings that took
place during these periods are listed in Annex 1.
4.2. Reports
During the two periods assessed (August 2005 - July 2006 and August 2006 - July 2007), the
Codex Trust Fund gave support to 124 and 184 participants respectively, and therefore should
have collected a total of 308 reports.
However, for these two periods, only 191 reports are actually available, 70 and 121 reports,
respectively.
2 The August to July period of each year is used for reports as countries must submit outstanding reports in order to be
eligible for continuing support from the Codex Trust Fund in the next calendar year. As applications are due at the
end of October of each year, and decision on support for the next calendar year are taken by the Consultative Group of
the Trust Fund in December of each year, countries cannot be expected to provide reports for meetings being attended
in the period September- December of the calendar year underway. Outstanding reports for any meeting attended in
the period September-December therefore become due for the next year.
7
Although the appraisal of the reports remains subjective, the establishment of clear assessment
criteria limits the bias.
The quality of the reports is inconsistent and there is a high level of discrepancy among reports
submitted to the Codex Trust Fund Secretariat. The quantity and the quality of the information
provided varies from delegate to delegate (e.g. from a 2 page report for Haiti's participant in the
35th
CCFL to a 163 page report for Iran participants in the 1st CCCF and 39
th CCFA).
With such a high proportion of reports categorized as Medium and Insufficient, extracting and
collecting information regarding the participation in meetings presented significant challenges. As
a result capturing the potential benefits from the meeting attendance and the resultant impact at the
national level has been reduced.
Finally, many delegations submitted a single report covering all national delegates and all
meetings attended during the period. In this study, these single reports have been considered as
valid for each delegate and meeting even though they are not, strictly speaking, following the
requisite of one report per participant and per meeting.
5. RESULTS OF THE COUNTRY REPORT ANALYSIS:
AUGUST 2005 – JULY 2006 and AUGUST 2006 – JULY 2007
5.1.Quantity and Quality of the reports
The following histogram compares the number of reports submitted to the Codex Trust Fund
secretariat with the number of participants funded.
Figure 3. Availability of the country reports
for the total period
Figure 4. Overall quality of country reports
from August 2005 to July 2007
Nu
mb
er o
f re
port
s
8
Figure 5. Country report availability
The first period observed that only 56% of the participants submitted a report while the following
period observed an increase to 66%.
Figure 6. Comparison in the quality of the reports between the two periods observed
When the Codex Trust Fund was established in 2003 it was deemed reasonable and legitimate the
participants/countries supported by the Trust Fund would be expected to provide reports
documenting in a comprehensive, clear and professional manner their participation in the Codex
meetings including the process leading to, participation during, and actions undertaken after
participation when delegates returned to their country of origin. The analysis of participant reports
for the period August 2005 to July 2006 show that approximately half of the reports submitted are
classified as “medium” or “insufficient”, with one third rated as “insufficient”. For the period
August 2006 to July 2007, approximately 60% of the reports are “medium” or “insufficient”.
There has been a small decrease in the number of “insufficient” reports and a noticeable increase
in the number of “medium” reports. However it is of note that the percentage of “excellent”
reports has decreased.
An improvement in the quality of the reports submitted is crucial to being able to capture
the impacts (both process and outcome) of Codex Trust Fund activities.
5.2. Overview of the results
The following histogram presents the percentage of reports showing positive evidence of
preparation for the meeting, active participation, debriefing and impact of the meeting.
Nu
mber
of
repo
rts
Per
centa
ge
of
rep
ort
s
9
Figure 7. Overview of the results
For the period August 2005-July 2006, 70% of the delegates that submitted a report affirm having
prepared for the meeting, while for the period August 2006-July 2007, this claim stands at only
57%.
The results presented in the diagram show that there is little variation between the two periods in
terms of level of preparation, participation, debriefing and impact.
5.3. Before the meetings
Figure 8. Preparation for the meeting
For both periods, more than half of the participants (70% and 57% respectively) that submitted a
report affirm having prepared in advance for the meeting they attended.
On the other hand, 10% of the participants for the first period and 4% for the second period clearly
express in their report that they did not prepare for the meeting in advance. Delegates provided
two principal reasons for not preparing in advance:
- The delegate received the agenda of the meeting and the support materials from Codex too
late and did not have time to prepare.
- The delegate participated for the first time in a Codex meeting and was attending as an
“observer”.
Per
centa
ge
of
rep
ort
s
Per
cen
tag
e o
f re
po
rts
10
Figure 9. Type of preparation* (from among yes responses)
* participants were free to indicate multiple types of preparation
Delegates identified four main types of preparation:
- Establishment of national position(s) on agenda item(s);
- Holding of national meeting to discuss Codex meeting;
- Preparation of material or elaboration of a document (e.g. response to a circular letter)
- Access and familiarization with documents provided by the Codex Secretariat
Other methods of preparation used, while less represented, included: intersectorial
communication; technical communication; other types of meetings with stakeholders.
5.4. During the meetings
Figure 10. Gain from the meeting
During the first period, 70% of the participants who submitted a report affirm that they gained
from attending the Codex meetings, while this number decreased slightly to 65% in the second
period.
Per
cen
tag
e o
f re
po
rts
Per
centa
ge
of
rep
ort
s
11
Figure 11. Type of benefit* (from among yes responses)
* participants were free to indicate multiple benefits
Analysis of the reports indicates that among the gains of participating in Codex meeting
participants highlight the following:
• a broad exposure to the subject of the meeting;
• learning the procedures and methodologies of Codex;
• accessing a leadership role;
• receiving information on a variety of subjects;
• increasing their network;
• being introduced to new concepts.
For both periods, the gain most cited is the opportunity to network. The second gain identified
from the reports is that delegates learn Codex procedures and receive and share information.
There is a decrease in the percentage of participants that say they gain a broad exposure from the
meeting. This is logically explained by the fact delegates gain broad exposure during their first
participation to the meetings and are looking for more in-depth gains (e.g. information, networks)
during subsequent meetings in which they participate.
5.5. After the meetings
After the meeting, participants’ priorities should be to share the information and the knowledge
acquired during the meeting and to implement changes at national level.
• Debriefing and sharing knowledge
Per
centa
ge
of
rep
ort
s
12
Figure 12. Evidence of debriefing and sharing knowledge
66% of the delegates in the first period and 69% for the second period report debriefing and
sharing knowledge upon return to their home country.
Figure 13. Type of evidence* (from among yes responses)
* participants were free to indicate multiple types
Among the participants that claim sharing their knowledge, more than half do so during their
National Codex Committee meeting, and more than a quarter during other meetings with
stakeholders. Moreover, 65% of delegates for the August 2005-July 2006 period and 78% of
delegates for August 2006-July 2007 period reported producing a summary document to submit to
the National Contact Point or to other stakeholders.
• Impact of the meeting at national level
Figure 14. Impact of the meetings
Per
centa
ge
of
rep
ort
s
Per
centa
ge
of
rep
ort
s
Per
centa
ge
of
rep
ort
s
13
For both periods, around 60% of the reports show evidence of the impacts of the meetings at the
national level.
Figure 15. Type of impact of the meeting at national level* (from among yes responses)
* participants were free to indicate multiple impacts
Among the impacts cited, two particularly stand out:
1) The impact on food safety systems;
2) The impact on regulatory activities.
Frequently cited examples of impact on the food safety system are the implementation of a
National Codex Committee and the improvement of its functioning. The most frequent example
quoted to express the impact on regulatory activities is the application or translation in the national
regulation/legislation of the Codex standards.
Regarding the impact on food trade, the participants refer to the World Trade Organization SPS
agreements and the measures the country is taking to comply with these agreements.
Per
cen
tag
e o
f re
po
rts
14
5.6. Challenges faced at national level
Figure 16. National challenges
21% of the reports for the first period and 26% for the second period underline the challenges
faced by the country.
Figure 17. Type of challenges faced* (from among yes responses)
* participants were free to indicate multiple challenges
Several different types of challenges were identified:
• The lack of legislative framework;
• The lack of national coordination;
• The lack of facilities and resources;
• The lack of political commitment;
• The lack of general awareness.
For both periods, the main challenge cited is the lack of facilities and resources. However, there is
a significant decrease from the first period to the second in the percentage of delegates that affirm
their country is lacking facilities and resources. Additionally, it should be underlined that there is
an increase in percentage of delegates that claim to be facing insufficient political commitment.
This is certainly an area for improvement.
Per
cen
tag
e o
f re
po
rts
Per
centa
ge
of
rep
ort
s
15
5.7. Requests for regional training
For each period, around 14% of the participants that submitted a report ask for more regional
trainings in order to help the country to establish a national food system that includes a National
Codex Committee and the implementation of Codex standards.
5.8. Conclusion
- The comparison of the two periods demonstrates that there has been little improvement in
the quantity and quality of reports submitted.
There are a number of possible explanations for both insufficient quantity and quality of reports
that need to be further explored. Among the issues that need to be looked at are the following:
• Timely submission of reports - The vast majority of countries do not submit reports to the
Codex Trust Fund immediately following (within the recommended one month) participation
in meetings. Reports tend to be submitted by countries at the same time that they submit their
application for support in the next calendar year. This may lead to difficulties at national level
for CCPs in following up with participants who have not submitted reports; a tendency to
write reports in a hurry simply to fulfil the reporting obligation, submitting one report for the
country that does not include sufficient information on participation in different meetings. A
large number of reports submitted at the same time as applications creates difficulties for the
Codex Trust Fund in the treatment of reports. The period October to November of each year is
the heaviest demand period for the Codex Trust Fund as this is the period during which
applications are received, assessed, support levels for the next year determined and
communications sent to countries. This is in addition to the administration of participants to
Codex meetings that fall in the last three months of the year. With the human resources
currently available the Codex Trust Fund has only been able to "tick the box" where there is
evidence that a report(s) have been received from countries, and to follow up with countries as
part of the application process where no reports have been received.
• Follow up on missing reports - Reports from the period 2005-2006 represent the first full year
of Codex Trust Fund operation. There was a certain leniency practiced by the Trust Fund
Secretariat in a number of areas to allow beneficiary countries to understand how the Codex
Trust Fund worked and the responsibilities of different parties. This leniency was applied to
the reporting process leading to a number of countries being able to participate in Codex
meetings in the next calendar year even where full reports had not been received for the 2005-
2006 reporting period. Better tracking practices were introduced in 2007 and strict follow up
was established in 2008. Countries for which there was no evidence of having submitted a
report(s) were sent e-mail communications informing them that this non-compliance would
jeopardize their support from the Trust Fund for participation in future meetings and the Trust
Fund Secretariat reserved the right to refuse to administer travel. However, this method of
pressuring countries to fulfil their reporting obligations can only work with countries who
have applied for participation and does not apply to countries who did not submit an
application, or who have graduated. Only a comprehensive assessment such as has been
carried out here allowed to shed full light on the insufficiencies in both quantity and quality
and to go beyond "ticking the box".
• Improved quality of reports - There is clearly a lack of information regarding the benefits of
investing in the preparation of high quality reports including:
- General lack of awareness about the objective and importance of the reports;
- Lack of incentives to provide good quality reports. Since neither incentives nor
sanctions are provided regarding the reports, participants that did not give reports or
16
that gave a medium / insufficient report for one period, have no incentive to improve it
the following year;
- Lack of feedback on reports. Since feedback is not provided regarding the reports,
delegates do not understand the changes required for improved reporting.
6. RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1. Stakeholder analysis
To better address the recommendations, the relevant stakeholders must be identified.
The main stakeholders are the Codex Trust Fund Secretariat, FAO/WHO/Codex Secretariat,
donors and beneficiaries.
Figure 18. Interaction between stakeholders
Codex Trust Fund Secretariat plays a central role in creating links between beneficiaries, donors
and FAO/WHO/Codex Secretariat.
6.2. Codex Trust Fund’s perspective: Why the Codex Trust Fund should assess reports
The following graph presents the reasons why the Codex Trust Fund should assess the country
reports.
17
Figure 19. Purpose of country reports assessment
In order to increase the organization’s accountability and to satisfy donors, the Codex Trust Fund
should show evidence of its performance and results. Therefore, the Codex Trust Fund should
measure carefully not only its outputs (to enhance participation of developing countries in Codex
meetings) but also its outcomes (the impact of the meeting at national level). The participant
reports are one key element allowing the Codex Trust Fund to capture both outputs and outcomes,
communicate this to different stakeholder groups, institute dialogue and exchange with different
stakeholder groups aimed at improving the efficiency and effectiveness of both Codex Trust Fund
activities as well as contributing to the wider improvement of international food standards
development and food safety systems.
6.3. Beneficiaries' perspective: Why they should write good reports
The data has shown that the beneficiary countries have very little incentive to write “excellent”
reports: No rewards are offered for high quality reports and no sanctions are applied for low
quality reports. This is a logical gap that should be addressed.
6.4. Key Performance Indicators
The principal criterion of success for the Codex Trust Fund is the enhancement of developing
countries’ participation in Codex meeting. This requires a straightforward monitoring of their
18
preparation, participation, and debriefing, as well as an assessment of the impact of the meetings
at the national level.
To measure the effectiveness of the Codex Trust Fund outputs, the following key performance
indicators (KPIs) might be considered:
- Quality and quantity of reports
• Number of weeks needed to receive 100% of the reports after each meeting graded
as good to excellent
• Number of weeks needed to give feedback after submission of a report
• Number of weeks the participant needs to improve its report after receiving
negative feedback
• Percentage of excellent/good/medium and insufficient reports received one month
after each meeting
• Percentage of excellent/good/medium and insufficient reports received at the
closing period
• Percentage of participants that follow the report template
- Preparation for meetings
• Percentage of participants that prepare before the meeting
• Percentage of each type of preparation
- Participation in meetings
• Percentage of participants that present their national position
- Debriefing
• Percentage of participants that share knowledge after the meeting
- Impact of the meetings
• Percentage of participants that present impact of the meetings
A further breakdown of these KPIs by groups, for example, by region, first/second/third
participation of the delegate/country, would be another means to gather relevant data.
A more in-depth analysis of the meeting outcomes should be implemented by the Codex Trust
Fund Secretariat.
6.5. Recommendations to improve the reporting process in and the effectiveness of the
Codex Trust Fund
STEP 1) INCREASE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CODEX CONTACT POINT AND
INCREASE AWARENESS AMONG BENEFICIARY COUNTRIES
The responsibility for sending the report should be transferred from the delegates to the Codex
Contact Point. Her/his role should be enhanced to be the person in charge not only of the
coordination of the travel but also of the submission of the reports on the delegates’ behalf. The
Codex Contact Point should ensure the on-time submission of the reports as well as their high
quality. Writing the report remains the responsibility of the participant but the Codex Contact
Point is in charge of its assessment and final submission. To be able to efficiently assess the
report, the Contact Point should receive clear criteria of assessment (e.g. a checklist).
To support the Codex Contact Point responsibility, the Codex Trust Fund Secretariat should
increase awareness about the report purpose, underline its importance, and commit resources to
the routine follow up and analysis of participant reports. A specific communication about the
reporting process should be distributed to all participants supported by the Codex Trust Fund
before each meeting, describing the expectation, including the format of the report, and the
obligation of the delegate. This could be part of any pre-meeting briefings held, as well as in
19
trainings, workshops, regional coordinating committees and other fora where Codex Trust Fund-
supported participants are gathered. It could also be included in the e-mail invitation letters sent to
supported participants.
Reports submitted to the Codex Trust Fund Secretariat should be considered as a reflection of the
country and therefore submitting good quality reports should be a matter of national pride. As a
further incentive, countries should be apprised that all participant reports will be made publicly
available on the Codex Trust Fund website.
STEP 2) CREATE INCENTIVE TO SUBMIT OUSTANDING REPORTS
Every report received by the Codex Trust Fund secretariat should be assessed within two weeks
after it is received and feedback should be provided to the Codex Contact Point. If the quality of
the report is good and the report was sent on time, the country receives the “Green Light” to
participate in the following meeting. On the other hand, if no report is submitted or the quality is
insufficient, the Codex Contact Point should be warned and while the report is not received within
the two following weeks, the participation of the country in further meetings is suspended.
STEP 3) STANDARDIZED ASSESSMENT OF THE COUNTRY REPORTS BY THE
CODEX TRUST FUND SECRETARIAT AND FEEDBACK TO THE CODEX CONTACT
POINT.
The Codex Trust Fund Secretariat should define criteria for the assessment of the reports and
communicate them to the Codex Contact Point. After receiving a report, the secretariat should be
able to provide feedback to the Contact Point within two weeks. The feedback process is crucial to
help the countries understand the expectations and the requirements for improvement.
STEP 4) FACILITATE THE REPORTING AND ASSESSMENT PROCESS
The Codex Trust Fund Secretariat should facilitate the reporting process and the assessment of
reports.
It could create an Internet platform where the Contact Point could access and submit the reports.
This platform would give support to write reports and to follow the template. This platform would
validate the submission of the report only when all fields required are filled. Therefore the report
will automatically follow the template, facilitating Codex Trust Fund assessment. The objective is
that the Codex Trust Fund Secretariat be able to assess each report in less than 10 minute.
Moreover, this platform would open the opportunity to easily share outstanding reports among
participants, as well as to develop “Story Telling” or profiles of highly performing/improving
countries, in order to increase the networking, to reward countries with high levels of initiative and
performance and to offer an incentive to others to follow the path.
While some countries still have difficulties accessing the Internet, these countries should be
offered the opportunity to submit their reports by post or fax. Reports received in this way could
then be entered into the web-based system by the Secretariat. Consequently, the Codex Trust Fund
Secretariat should develop a new format template that strictly follows the online template and puts
an emphasis on the expectations.
The argument that gives incentive to the Codex Contact Point to submit the reports online, is that
the so called “Green Light” for attending next meeting will be given much faster (maximum
within six weeks after the meeting). The objective would be to have the first year approximately
20% of the reports submitted online, 50% by 2010 and 80% by 2011.
20
Finally, while the Internet platform would facilitate the assessment and also the recording of the
reports, it could be extended to the application process.
21
ANNEX 1. LIST OF MEETINGS
August 2005 – July 2006
• 5th
Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Task Force on Food Derived from Biotechnology, 19-23 Sep 05,
Chiba
• 27th
Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses, 21-25 Nov 05, Bonn
• 14th
Codex Committee on Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification Systems, 28
Nov - 02 Dec 05, Melbourne
• 7th
Codex Committee on Milk and Milk Products, 27 March - 01 April 06, Queenstown
• 38th
Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues, 03-08 April 06, Fortaleza
• 23rd
Codex Committee on General Principles, 10-14 April 06, Paris
• 38th
Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants, 24-28 April 06, The Hague
• 34th
Codex Committee on Food Labelling, 01-05 May 06, Ottawa
• 16th
Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods, 8-12 May 06, Cancun
• 27th
Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling, 15-19 May 06, Budapest
• 29th
Codex Alimentarius Commission, 03-07 July 06, Geneva
August 2006 – July 2007
• 28th
Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products, 18-22 Sep 06, Beijing
• 13th
Codex Committee on Fresh Fruits and Vegetables, 25-29 Sep 06, Mexico
• 9th
Coordinating Committee for North America and South West Pacific, 10-13 Oct 06, Apia
• 23rd
Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables, 16-21 Oct 06, Arlington
• 28th
Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses, 30 Oct-3Nov 06,
Chiang Maï
• 15th
Codex Committee on Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification Systems, 06-10
Nov 06, Mar del Plata
• 15th
Coordinating Committee for Latin America and the Caribbean, 13-17 Nov 06, Mar del
Plata
• 15th
FAO/WHO Coordinating Committee for Asia, 21-24 Nov 06, Seoul
• 6th
Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Task Force on Food Derived from Biotechnology, 27 Nov-01
Dec 06, Chiba
• 38th
Codex Committee on Food Hygiene, 04-09 Dec 06, Houston
• 25th
FAO/WHO Coordinating Committee for Europe, 15-18 Jan 07, Vilnius
• 17th
FAO/WHO Coordinating Committee for Africa, 23-26 Jan 07, Rabat
• 20th
Codex Committee on Fats and Oils, 19-23 Feb 07, London
• 4th
FAO/WHO Coordinating Committee for Near East, 26 Feb-01 March 07, Amman
• 28th
Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling, 05-09 March 07, Budapest
• 24th
Codex Committee on General Principles, 02-06 April 07, Paris
• 1st Codex Committee on Contaminants in Foods, 16-20 April 07, Beijing
• 39th
Codex Committee on Food Additives, 24-28 April 07, Beijing
• 35th
Codex Committee on Food Labelling, 30 April-04 May 07, Ottawa
• 39th
Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues, 07-12 May 07, Beijing
• 30th
Codex Alimentarius Commission, 26-29 June 07, Rome
22
ANNEX 2. QUOTES FROM REPORTS OF PARTICULAR INTEREST
1. Benefits from the meetings
35
th CCFL Guyana: “ The delegate gained many benefits from participating in the meeting.
- The delegate had the opportunity to make a contribution to the development of international food
standards even though he is from a poor developing country. He had a say in the development of
such standards taking into consideration his country situation as this would be reflected in the
standards. This was made possible by virtue of the support and blessings of the Trust Fund. The
delegate would be better able to implement such standards in his home country.
- The meeting induced an understanding and thus, deepen such understanding of how these
international food standards are developed. For example, understanding the reasons for certain
substances to be included in Tables and others to be deleted. Attending the meetings makes one
conscious of the amount of research, debate, discussions, deliberations, energy and time that go
into the development of these international standards. One would simply look at such standards
and use them on a day-to-day basis without this realization.
- Participating in the meeting, and making contributions provided a form of training to the
delegate and important experience as well, which is an asset to the Codex Programme in home
country. Much of this is derived by witnessing the expertise of contributions made by other
experienced delegates, and delegates from the developed countries.
- The delegate developed better confidence and motivation in returning and promoting codex
activities in the home country.”
35th
CCFL Vanuatu: “The delegates gained confidence from participating in the meeting and
strengthened their knowledge to find ways in further upgrading our systems that are already in
place.”
2. Impacts of the meetings
- General impacts 30
th CAC Mali:
“La participation du Mali aux activités à Contribuer à :
- Améliorer le cadre législatif et réglementaire de la normalisation et du contrôle des denrées
alimentaires;
- Améliorer la participation des parties prenantes aux activités d’élaboration des normes ;
- Améliorer l'expertise nationale dans le domaine de la normalisation et du contrôle des denrées
alimentaires;
- Améliorer l’information des consommateurs et des parties intéressées sur la qualité et la sécurité
des aliments;
- Améliorer les activités des laboratoires et des services techniques de contrôle ;
- Améliorer l’utilisation des normes par les industries alimentaires
- Favoriser l’utilisation des normes du Codex comme règlements nationaux.”
17th
CCAfrica Tanzania:
“The country intended to participate fully in the process of ensuring adoption of the same by the
Commission as there is a national need for such standards for assisting local production and for
control of import trade. Following their adoption during the session under review, the cheese
standards are now being adopted as national standards. The adopted MRLs will greatly guide our
rapidly growing fruit and vegetables industry domestic and external trade”.
23
24th
CCGP Ethiopia:
“ - At the national level, there is an effort to establish national food safety inspection body
sponsored by UNIDO and this meeting will enable us to:
• Increase in the awareness of the use of codex standards,
• Awareness to National governments to use different approaches in application of risk
analysis principles taking into account national capacities & resources,
• Awareness on requirements for food in international trade,
• Enable to overcome the difficulties in implementing effective food import controls,
• Enable to be aware of the defined guiding principles that could lead to more balanced
relationships in the food trade.
(…)
- The participation of codex meetings enables the adoption of more internationally harmonized
codex standards that can be used at the national level for food control, food safety and relevant
food regulatory systems.
- It also creates awareness how to attend other codex committees to contribute more efficiently to
the work of codex through the development of regional coordinating committees as long as
consistent with codex principles.”
38th
CCFH Madagascar:
“La participation a entraîné des changements au niveau national. Elle permettra de connaître
l’enjeu du contrôle des denrées alimentaires au niveau des pays et les contraintes sur le commerce
international, donc il faudrait en tenir compte si l’on veut assurer la sécurité sanitaire, la protection
des consommateurs et pour que les produits soient compétitifs sur le plan international.
Elle a un impact positif sur l’application des normes du codex et/ou sur la législation relative à
l’alimentation et son respect. A défaut des textes réglementaires dans le pays, on a pris comme
référence voire même adopté les normes Codex. La participation a entraîné des changements au
niveau national. Elle permettra de connaître l’enjeu du contrôle des denrées alimentaires au niveau
des pays et les contraintes sur le commerce international, donc il faudrait en tenir compte si l’on
veut assurer la sécurité sanitaire, la protection des consommateurs et pour que les produits soient
compétitifs sur le plan international.
Elle a un impact positif sur l’application des normes du codex et/ou sur la législation relative à
l’alimentation et son respect. A défaut des textes réglementaires dans le pays, on a pris comme
référence voire même adopté les normes codex. »
- Networking and Collaboration 39
th CCFA Serbia:
“During the meetings, a lot of contacts and acquaintances have been established with the
representatives from different participating countries. These contacts could be of great benefit for
further joint work in Codex activities and in bi-lateral and regional relationship between the
national Codex structures and competent authorities.”
- Transfer of information – Increase awareness of other stakeholders 30
th CAC Bhutan:
“Currently, major agriculture exports from Bhutan are fresh apples, mandarin, mushroom and
asparagus. These commodities are exported during specific months of the year when they are
grown. Meetings are held with the exporters of these commodities very year prior to the actual
exports during which the quality standards required for export are discussed. During such
meetings, the role of Codex and its standards are explained to the exporters.”
24
- SPS Agreements – Food trade awareness 30
th CAC Bhutan:
“Participation in Codex Meetings has helped in preparing the Legislative Action Plan for the
implementation of the Agreement on SPS measures consistent with WTO norms.”
30th
CAC Vietnam:
“As a member of WTO, Vietnam has responsibilities in fulfilling the obligations provided in SPS
and TBT Agreements. Therefore, Vietnam had adopted as much as possible international
standards (included Codex Standards) and transfer them in to national Standards or concerned
regulatory documents in many aspects including Fruit and Vegetables, Milk and Milk Products,
Fats and Oils, Food Additives, Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods, Pesticide residues.”
15th
CCFICS Guyana:
“Guyana as many other developing countries has its difficulties in trying to keep up to date with
the constant changing demands of the consumer and of the international regulations due to limited
resources, financial, technical, human among others. As a member of the WTO it is obligated to
implement the World Trade Organisation Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures-WTO SPS
Agreement entailing the implementation of Codex, International Plant Protection Convention-
IPPC and International Organisation of Epizootics-OIE standards as measures to enhance food
safety and gain market access for it’s products (...) Guyana is faithful to the ideals of Codex
relative to consumer protection and safe foods moving in international trade. In this regards efforts
to implement sanitary and phyto-sanitary SPS and technical barriers to trade TBT measures that
are equivalent, transparent, harmonized and are risk based, are of strategic importance to Guyana
as a country with great export potential.”
- Creation of Working groups 30
th CAC Tanzania:
“The NCC has formed Working Groups (WGs) of five members each inline with the various
Codex Committees and with the Codex Contact Point Officer as the technical secretary. These
WGs meet and discuss on current issues on the Codex Committees’ agenda and advise the NCC
on national positions. National delegates to Codex Committees’ sessions are invited to the
respective WGs meetings”
3. Complaints
- Codex documents arrive too late 39
th CCFA Madagascar:
“Sur sept réunions financées par le fonds fiduciaire, le pays n’a répondu qu’à une note circulaire
(CCFL) du fait que les documents sont parvenus tardivement (à la veille du départ des délégués)
ou ne sont pas du tout arrivés au pays”
- Choice of participant funded 39
th CCFA Nepal:
“It is not worthy to provide support for many participants from the countries where there are
several participants. But, it would be beneficial to provide support for at least two participants
from the under developed and developing countries.”
- Increase role of developing countries 30
th CAC Colombia:
25
“Colombia como miembro activo del Codex Alimentarius, resalta como elemento de gran
importancia los espacios de participación de las diferentes delegaciones en la toma de las
decisiones de mayor relevancia en el contexto internacional. No obstante lo anterior,
comedidamente sugiere a la asamblea general y a las demás países miembros, ampliar y difundir
el espacio de participación para aquellas delegaciones provenientes de los países en vía de
desarrollo, toda vez que las decisiones tomadas por la asamblea general, generan alto impacto en
las políticas sanitarias y de inocuidad de los alimentos en sus respectivos territorios, especialmente
para aquellos que actualmente adelantan procesos de integración económica intraregional y que
por lo tanto requieren fortalecer internamente los procesos y procedimientos tendientes a
garantizar políticas sanitarias y de inocuidad alimentaria.”
4. Requests for regional training
30th
CAC Armenia:
“We recommend to be supported again by the Trust Fund through trainings providing practical
exercises on how to actively get involved in Codex activities, how to develop the country’s
position, and finally how to establish a good functioning Codex Office and a National Codex
Committee.”
15th
CCAsia India:
“Does the country have any suggestions (…) in the Trust Fund procedure?
Codex process:
- Early receipt of agenda. It has been recorded in the recent past that in many of the Codex
meetings some agenda items are received late enough prior to the meeting so that the stakeholders
do not find adequate time to respond to these agenda items. It is therefore requested that the
agenda items should be circulated at least two months before the meeting as per the guideline of
Codex Procedure Manuals.
- Assistance in organizing meetings of National Codex Contact Points, at regional levels to discuss
issues of common concerned targeted for better interventions in Codex process. »